grendel Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 3 hours ago, smellyloo said: I often drive from Norwich to Winterton via Acle and look forward to crossing the Acle Dam. I always get a buzz crossing over water and catching a glimpse of the boats, So for me this is an ideal place to build an eye catching, iconic visitor centre. I suspect it would draw the attention of many passing motorists who would then take a nosey. So for me this is a far better location than Whitlingham or Howe Hill which are really tucked away places, and hardly likely to attract passing trade. If, however, as some seem to suggest we go for the cheap option of a shed with bins & water hose then it will attract precicely nobody ..... except the passing boaters! and therin lies another issue with the site, you like myself and many others I suspect spare a glance as we cross the bridge for whats happening on the water, suppose as we are glancing at the boats, there is a coach full of children turning into the entrance of the proposed centre, are we going to see it in time to stop? a bad entrance at the best of times, compounded with a good view from the top of the bridge makes for a dangerous turning for coaches or cars parking at the site. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 I have experienced near misses whilst at the wheel of Coach (through no fault of my own) and I think unless there are some changes to road layout this location has the hallmarks of a serious accident waiting to happen. I may well not be listened to but thats not a reason to keep quiet! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisB Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 Traffic lights. Would also break up the traffic making the right turn out of the B1152 much safer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 Perhaps it would also help if people adhered to the speed recommendation over the bridge - and I suspect the designer of the adjacent land will be able to think of plenty of things to slow traffic to an acceptable speed - if it gets the go ahead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclemike Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 as i see it mm even at 30 mph there is still a potential for accidents , car A stops but cars B and C (tailgating)fail and then you have a multivehicle pile up 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 I don't think this visitors centre is a good use of anyone's money, but please can we make the objections sensible? The turn-in to the Bridge Pub is almost identical in mirror image to the turn-in to this site. The turn in to Pedros/The BBC is very similar, and is arguably more dangerous because cars coming from the North and turning right into Pedros are blocking the road just after the bridge, so are not seen until the brow. If those traffic movements are acceptable now, then how will use of this site be different? Coaches visit the Bridge and Pedros, right now. Either, you lobby the Council/Police etc to do something about this CURRENT deathtrap right now, or you stop pretending its a big issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 I would say its an issue significant enough to require careful consideration which would obviously happen at the in house planning stage anyway. Its not going to be a show stopper but looking on google earth the layout of the existing turn into the site is not particularly suited to a Coach if you expect to make the turn in one go coming in or out, I havent taken a lot of notice of the entrance when passing in person but you do not want to be shunting a bus to make a turn onto or off of a main road. Reminds me of a time in the Lakes I had to stop traffic and ask other motorists to block a road for me as the only way I was getting an 11.2m vehicle out of the entrance to a special needs adventure centre centre I had dropped some children at was to reverse out. Its a major consideration in my opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted August 10, 2018 Share Posted August 10, 2018 If this 'folly' gets as far as planning then we shall all have the opportunity to comment, whether for or against. Traffic is one obvious issue. The other concern is the path so far taken in arriving at this point. Questions do need to be asked and thankfully there are members of the Authority seemingly determined to ask them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 I have been reading over the last 24 hours of this discussion, and two things stand out for me : 1/. I have heard "along the rhond" that there were strong objections from the local highways authority to what we might call the "Pedros" development, mostly due to the danger posed by Acle bridge, on a trunk road. If this is true, then the BA as planning authority must have ignored those objections when granting permission. So one assumes they may do the same thing now? 2/. What is a visitor centre? Marshman has mentioned the one at the NWT reserve, but that is the destination for the tourists. They are going there deliberately to visit the reserve, and have the facility of the visitor centre, while they are there. Acle bridge is not a holiday destination. So if they are now going to create some place where coach parties can stop for a nice "cuppa", something to eat, have a pee and look at the river, then surely the BA are just using the toll budget to subsidise some kind of "transport caff". This is sounding more like Wroxham Barns, than a visitor centre! 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 I thought it might be worth explaining what I mean by holiday destination. In the tourist business, if you are marketing package vacations to a hotel balcony overlooking a Mediterranean beach, then that is fine. That is the destination. Up to the "punters" to make their own fun from there. Marketing cruising, or touring, or even cycling holidays is very different. In that case, it is not where you start from that counts - it is the cruise destination. So it is fine to start your Broads holiday from a little boatyard with a tin shed up a dyke in Brundall, because the site was chosen as it is right beside the main line railway station. What matters to you is that this start point gives you a wonderful cruise around the rivers Yare and Waveney for your weeks holiday. So the cruise is the destination. The start point is just where you picked the boat up from, and parked your car. Do you feel that I am starting to describe Acle? I have started up a few boatyard bases from scratch in France as well as in the U.S. and the success was always because the cruising area could offer the places to visit. Where you started from was just logistics. It needed to be accessible by road, rail and air. It needed to be in a town, with a bank, shops, a pub, a restaurant, a hotel and a doctor. And sometimes, a vet! It also had to have the facilities to maintain the boats. But it was not the holiday destination. With this in mind I can't see any marketing reason why the BA should feel the need for a visitor centre in Acle when so many others around the Broads have already closed? I hope they don't intend to start hiring electric day boats, or canoes, right under the bridge, with all that rise and fall of tide, and all that current? Do they? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModeratorTeam Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 This is a very interesting discussion, but please can we remember that personal criticism is against TOS? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanessan Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 Have I missed something? I haven’t seen any ‘personal criticism’ so have posts been removed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polly Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 A few that drifted into conflict are currently hidden, Vanessa. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.